ملف ٢٩٠٨/١٩٠٧ الجزء ٣ "الخليج الفارسي: الحجر الصحي؛ شكوى ألمانية" [ظ‎‎١‎١‎٦] (٢٥٠/٢٣٢)

British views as to disease-proplijlaxis, while, in regard to commeicial
kiterests, shipping is a distinct gainer in some direct.cns and, if a loser
in otliers, is so to a far less extent than was anticipated Mould he t .
mse before the work of the Conference began.
^We proceed, in conclusion, to consider the practical results which
J y hJcxpectcd to follow the acceptance or the rejection of the present
C The^neral political advantages which the unanimous acceptance of
an international instrument of this kind presents, and the unfortunate
impression which might result from its rejection, or even from its
acceptance with reserves on important points, by Gi eat Britain, are
matters upon which it is unnecessary to dwell at length, they aie
factors which cannot he lost sight of in a review of all the considerations
for and against the acceptance of the Convention. There are other
advantages presented by accepting the Convention, and disadvantages m
its rejection, which we proceed to point out. . ...
Should the existing Conventions remain in force, the position m
regard to rat-measures would he distinctly less iavouranle, m our
ophiion, than it would he under the terms of the new Convention
Under existing conditions the Powers arc under no agreement ol^any
kind in regard to rat destruction. Each country, therefore, feels hsck
more or less free to impose what measures it thinks fit. The result is
an entire lack of uniformity in the measures imposed, great uncertainty
for shipping as to the restrictions they may he called upon to unoeigo
in a new port of arrival, and unnecessarily stringent measures in cert ain
countries. It will suffice, in this connection, to point to the recent
Erench decree, making rat destruction compulsory on all ships from
infected ports, and to the Turkish “ reglement ” dealing with the same
matter.
The acceptance of the new Convention would at least substitute order
for disorder; it would establish a maximum of rat measures, and would
give ships the right—which they do not now possess—of claiming
compensation whenever a port authority should go beyond that
maximum. We may think this maximum placed at a higher point than
we would have wished, hut we would repeat that it is very much lower
than we had anticipated, and very much lower than is now adopted in
some countries. In those countries, at least, British shipping would
gain considerably by the aceeptance of the new Convention. We would
point out that the iat measures are very distinctly limited and defined
by the draft Convention. Thus, they are not to cause damage to goods
or ships; their application is not to last more than 24 hours in certain
cases, 48 hours in other cases. None of these restrictions exist in any
international agreement at present; and they are not always respected
in practice.
We could have wished that less latitude had been left to a port
authority in the matter of rat destruction on healthy ships from infected
ports ; and that the power had not been left to port authorities to send
ships to another port for the purpose of rat destruction. But we are
far from thinking these points of sufficient importance to justify the
rejection of the new Convention.
In regard to the latter point—the power to repulse a ship to another
port—it will he useful to point out what are the provisions of existing
conventions and how they work out in practice. Under existing Con
ventions contracting countries must provide on every seaboard at least
one port furnished with the means for “ dealing with a ship, whatever
may he its sanitary condition.” Under these circumstances, ships
destined for a country where they would be liable to sanitary measures
go direct to the port where the means for applying these measures are
Known to exist, instead of going first to their port of destination, only
to he repuhed to the fully equipped pore. Eor example, a ship from
Bombay bound for Toulon would go first to Marseilles. These pro
in regard to
v — — — first to Marseilles.
visions, and this practice, will remain exactly the same,